"Richard Riley" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 08:16:30 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:

Oh, you guyz gotta read this. It is (you should pardon the expression) a
hoot(er). The hell of it is, he might just have more than a grain of
truth
in it.

Yes.

Many (starting with PJ O'Rourke) have expounded on Babe Theory.

http://www.willisms.com/archives/200...n_the_bab.html

Although the OP seemed to extrapolate the Babe Theory to the Sit-Com level
and beyond, he did make a couple of very valid points, with which I
wholeheartedly agree:

1) We need more households where aviation is a highly regarded activity
and if that means that aviation events should also function as Meet Markets;
then I really don't see a problem. We will merely be making the events a
little more enjoyable, the refreshment vendors will sell more sandwiches and
lemonade, a few more aircraft (and parts and plans) will be sold, and there
will more aviation oriented families--even if they came there together.
IMHO, all of those and more are good things.

2) Young Eagles is just plain silly. I have been critical of the age
group definition from the start, and have stated in my local chapter that
the ages should be 16 through 25 instead of 8 through 17. Needless to say,
that has not brought any agreement from my peers. However, my rationale is
simply that 16 is the age at which medical certification can be issued, and
therefore 16 is the age at which one can solo. Actually, there are probably
some credible arguments for 15 or 18 as well; but the point is that most of
the 8 through 12 year olds will find plenty of other interests before they
can return for flight instruction and a single short flight will not remain
that memorable for that long.

BTW, I realize that Flying Start is supposed to exist for the ages of 18 and
over; but I really think that the Young Eagles format would have more long
term success in the older age gorups.

Peter
Just my $0.02